Religion, Good or Bad?

[Iron Confederation]

Alright, I'm curious. What do the Skeptic's Annotations say about "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you", and Jesus ordering Peter to put away his sword?

I don't know, why don't you
Skeptic's annotated bible

Ah, it's a website. I apologize, I figured you were reading out of a hard copy since you didn't post a link.

...

It seems to give thumbs up to "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you", so that's a plus. However, I don't see many instances of these annotations listing possible good implications behind statements of Jesus; also, it seems to take Jesus literally about "If your right eye causes you to sin, gouge it out and throw it away". And I highly doubt you can find any Christian who takes that literally.

So it seems pretty biased to me.

[Personal Freedom]

I don't know, why don't you
Skeptic's annotated bible

Ah, it's a website. I apologize, I figured you were reading out of a hard copy since you didn't post a link.

...

It seems to give thumbs up to "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you", so that's a plus. However, I don't see many instances of these annotations listing possible good implications behind statements of Jesus; also, it seems to take Jesus literally about "If your right eye causes you to sin, gouge it out and throw it away". And I highly doubt you can find any Christian who takes that literally.

So it seems pretty biased to me.

Mathew says that line too. It the Presbyterian Church down the road I visit occasionally they worship that line.

[Occupied Deutschland]

All of those are from the old testament, first of all, which is mostly irrelevant to Christians, because they are not Jewish ethnicity-wise for the most part. You forget that those rules apply to the "chosen people of God", which were the Jews.

Jesus strongly approves of the law and the prophets. He hasn't the slightest objection to the cruelties of the Old Testament. 5:17 (1)

Families will be torn apart because of Jesus (this is one of the few "prophecies" in the Bible that has actually come true). "Brother shall deliver up the brother to death, and the father the child: and the children shall rise up against their parents, and cause them to be put to death." 10:21 (2)

Jesus condemns entire cities to dreadful deaths and to the eternal torment of hell because they didn't care for his preaching. 11:20-24 (3)

Jesus criticizes the Jews for not killing their disobedient children as required by Old Testament law. (See Ex 21:15, Lev 20:9, Dt 21:18-21) 7:9-10 (4)

1) That's not quite what is being said. In this verse, Jesus refers to himself as the 'Fulfillment of the Law', which could well be a reference to his status of fulfilling the Old Testament covenant ('Law' in this usage) between mankind and God. Alternatively, as the next verses deal with one's behavior and obedience towards the 'law' (authorities) it could well be a reference to this as well. The 'cruelties' of the Old Testament aren't really a topic of discussion here except insofar as he references himself in relation to them.

2) Curiously, this verse in context is actually referring to Christians being persecuted against by all manner of people for their beliefs.

16 Behold, I send you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves: be ye therefore wise as serpents, and harmless as doves.

17 But beware of men: for they will deliver you up to the councils, and they will scourge you in their synagogues;

18 And ye shall be brought before governors and kings for my sake, for a testimony against them and the Gentiles.

19 But when they deliver you up, take no thought how or what ye shall speak: for it shall be given you in that same hour what ye shall speak.

20 For it is not ye that speak, but the Spirit of your Father which speaketh in you.

21 And the brother shall deliver up the brother to death, and the father the child: and the children shall rise up against their parents, and cause them to be put to death.

22 And ye shall be hated of all men for my name's sake: but he that endureth to the end shall be saved.

This is referencing Christians parents, children, and brothers turning them in to authorities for their beliefs, not Christians doing so.

3) This is half-true. In these verses Jesus condemns these towns for bearing witness to his miracles and still not believing in him. He does not, it should be pointed out, condemn them to death but make it clear that come judgement day they would not be saved. This is not a condemnation to death as directly as this sceptic's bible is attempting to paint it.

4) This is just blatantly wrong.

5 So the Pharisees and teachers of the law asked Jesus, “Why don’t your disciples live according to the tradition of the elders instead of eating their food with defiled hands?”

6 He replied, “Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you hypocrites; as it is written:

“‘These people honor me with their lips,
but their hearts are far from me.
7 They worship me in vain;
their teachings are merely human rules.’[b]

8 You have let go of the commands of God and are holding on to human traditions.”

9 And he continued, “You have a fine way of setting aside the commands of God in order to observe[c] your own traditions! 10 For Moses said, ‘Honor your father and mother,’[d] and, ‘Anyone who curses their father or mother is to be put to death.’[e] 11 But you say that if anyone declares that what might have been used to help their father or mother is Corban (that is, devoted to God)— 12 then you no longer let them do anything for their father or mother. 13 Thus you nullify the word of God by your tradition that you have handed down. And you do many things like that.”

These verses have Jesus condemning the pharisees as hypocrites for twisting the letter of the law to contradict the spirit.


I am rather unimpressed by the skeptic's bible from this.

[Rightist America]

The religion does not kill people. People may say it is for their religion but the religion most likely will be against violence. Atheist are not the cause for war either.

[Utceforp]

There are a lot of reasons why religion is bad. First, no matter how much you try, fundamentalists and luddites will always flock to religion as a justification for opposing change. Speaking of a lack of change, religion is bad simply because it, and the ideals it upholds, cannot change as quickly as people do. When a religion first starts, it generally has some good ideas. "Though shall not kill" and whatnot are usually the norm. However, everything a religion tells you to do is the word of capital-G God, and therefore hard to oppose unless you convince everyone you're a mouthpiece for God or the local monotheistic deity rewriting His own holy texts. So, when times and people's attitudes change, religion doesn't. Casual sexism and racism mentioned in religious texts that would have been simply facts of life when the religion was founded persist because the religion cannot be changed nearly as quickly as people do. Finally, willful ignorance (AKA "Faith") is just, in general, a bad thing.

[Baader-Meinhof Gruppe]

Religion isn't good or bad. People are good or bad. An average Christian is usually a good person, someone in the KKK or Westboro is not a good person and technically they are counted as "Christian". Average Muslim is good, someone in ISIL is not. List goes on. Hitler is the classic example, you could point to evidence saying he was religious and evidence saying he wasn't but either way he's an evil twat.

[Menassa]

Have you even read the bible?

The whole thing is basically kill this or that group. Takes these for example: "If a man still prophesies, his parents, father and mother, shall say to him, "You shall not live, because you have spoken a lie in the name of the Lord." When he prophesies, his parents, father and mother, shall thrust him through." (Zechariah 13:3 NAB), "You should not let a sorceress live." (Exodus 22:17 NAB), and "If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kill him." (Deuteronomy 13:7-12 NAB). Not exactly "burn the heathen", but close enough. And remember you have kill according to the bible, "Cursed be he who does the Lords work remissly, cursed he who holds back his sword from blood." (Jeremiah 48:10 NAB)

[...] You forget that those rules apply to the "chosen people of God", which were the Jews.

Were?

[Ikania]

Religion can be good. If you go to church every sunday to pray, that's fine. If you go to a mosque and pray to Allah, that's fine. If you go to a church and blow it up, that is NOT fine. If you go to a mosque and blow it up, that is NOT fine. Religion is good. Religious violence is not. Nor is religious intolerance or idiocy. Like seriously, what's with creationists these days?

[Menassa]

Religion can be good. If you go to church every sunday to pray, that's fine. If you go to a mosque and pray to Allah, that's fine. If you go to a church and blow it up, that is NOT fine. If you go to a mosque and blow it up, that is NOT fine. Religion is good. Religious violence is not. Nor is religious intolerance or idiocy. Like seriously, what's with creationists these days?

Are they intolerant?

[Estado Paulista]

Religion can be good. If you go to church every sunday to pray, that's fine. If you go to a mosque and pray to Allah, that's fine. If you go to a church and blow it up, that is NOT fine. If you go to a mosque and blow it up, that is NOT fine. Religion is good. Religious violence is not. Nor is religious intolerance or idiocy. Like seriously, what's with creationists these days?

Do creationists blow up mosques?

[Conservative Conservationists]

I think the effect of religion is best explained in graphs















I could go on. Basically, none of it is good

[DrakoLand]

It is the opium of the people.

I thought opium was the opium of the people.

[DrakoLand]

[...] You forget that those rules apply to the "chosen people of God", which were the Jews.

Were?

"Insert God abandoned you when you killed his son cliche - here"

[Luepola]

1. Naziism is not based on Christianity. 2. Albert Speer, Hitler's chief architect, stated that Naziism was based on 'modern, secular science', and 3. that Christianity was ill-suitable, incomparable, and incompatible with Naziism.

Just wanted to make that clear.

1. The program the Nazi party (see point 24) would like to disagree as it enshrines "positive christianity" as a tenant of Nazism.

2. Hitler's own statements hold more weight:

"My feelings as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded only by a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against them and who, God's truth! was greatest not as a sufferer but as a fighter. In boundless love as a Christian and as a man I read through the passage which tells us how the Lord at last rose in His might and seized the scourge to drive out of the Temple the brood of vipers and adders. How terrific was His fight for the world against the Jewish poison. To-day, after two thousand years, with deepest emotion I recognize more profoundly than ever before in the fact that it was for this that He had to shed His blood upon the Cross. As a Christian I have no duty to allow myself to be cheated, but I have the duty to be a fighter for truth and justice.... And if there is anything which could demonstrate that we are acting rightly it is the distress that daily grows. For as a Christian I have also a duty to my own people.... When I go out in the morning and see these men standing in their queues and look into their pinched faces, then I believe I would be no Christian, but a very devil if I felt no pity for them, if I did not, as did our Lord two thousand years ago, turn against those by whom to-day this poor people is plundered and exploited."
-Adolf Hitler, speech in Munich, 12 April 1922

I can provide more quotes if you like.

3. I take it that is why the Nazis established the German Reich Christian Church in 1933?

1 and 2. Keep in mind that Hitler and the Nazis did make a fair amount of initial concessions to the church and false proclamations of belief to gain more power and credibility with the Nazi people. If Hitler was a professing Christian, then his Christianity was far different and distorted from true, Biblical Christianity. For example, in the passage that Hitler referenced, Jesus took up the scourge and started whacking people because they were abusing the temple and running what could be considered blasphemous or sacrilegious businesses out of the temple. Jesus also certainly did not descend to earth to 'fight for the world', no less against 'the Jewish poison'. The Christians that I know (which is quite a few hundred, from multiple churches in the area) all accept the fact that the Jews are not a poison to mankind, but are in fact God's chosen people.

3. Hitler's church was a heavily distorted, altered, and anti-semitic version of true Christianity, as detailed in the first post. I remember reading that Hitler imprisoned many church pastors and replaced them with his own Nazi pastors, who would spread said distorted Christianity. I also remember that he also made his own version of the Bible that was basically rewritten to become tolerant/accepting of Nazi ideas (including, but certainly not limited to, the fact that Jesus was supposedly Aryan, rather than Jewish, and the replacement of the cross in most public displays with the swastika).

It is also worth noting that Hitler respected the Catholic church (while showing contempt at best for Protestants). However, this was more because of the Catholic Church's political power, and certainly not because of their teachings or values.

[Menassa]

Were?

"Insert God abandoned you when you killed his son cliche - here"

Funny, I thought God would be a bit more rational than that.

[The Greater Ohio Valley]

Religious fundamentalism is bad.

[Conservative Conservationists]

1. The program the Nazi party (see point 24) would like to disagree as it enshrines "positive christianity" as a tenant of Nazism.

2. Hitler's own statements hold more weight:

"My feelings as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded only by a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against them and who, God's truth! was greatest not as a sufferer but as a fighter. In boundless love as a Christian and as a man I read through the passage which tells us how the Lord at last rose in His might and seized the scourge to drive out of the Temple the brood of vipers and adders. How terrific was His fight for the world against the Jewish poison. To-day, after two thousand years, with deepest emotion I recognize more profoundly than ever before in the fact that it was for this that He had to shed His blood upon the Cross. As a Christian I have no duty to allow myself to be cheated, but I have the duty to be a fighter for truth and justice.... And if there is anything which could demonstrate that we are acting rightly it is the distress that daily grows. For as a Christian I have also a duty to my own people.... When I go out in the morning and see these men standing in their queues and look into their pinched faces, then I believe I would be no Christian, but a very devil if I felt no pity for them, if I did not, as did our Lord two thousand years ago, turn against those by whom to-day this poor people is plundered and exploited."
-Adolf Hitler, speech in Munich, 12 April 1922

I can provide more quotes if you like.

3. I take it that is why the Nazis established the German Reich Christian Church in 1933?

1 and 2. Keep in mind that Hitler and the Nazis did make a fair amount of initial concessions to the church and false proclamations of belief to gain more power and credibility with the Nazi people. If Hitler was a professing Christian, then his Christianity was far different and distorted from true, Biblical Christianity. For example, in the passage that Hitler referenced, Jesus took up the scourge and started whacking people because they were abusing the temple and running what could be considered blasphemous or sacrilegious businesses out of the temple. Jesus also certainly did not descend to earth to 'fight for the world', no less against 'the Jewish poison'. The Christians that I know (which is quite a few hundred, from multiple churches in the area) all accept the fact that the Jews are not a poison to mankind, but are in fact God's chosen people.

3. Hitler's church was a heavily distorted, altered, and anti-semitic version of true Christianity, as detailed in the first post. I remember reading that Hitler imprisoned many church pastors and replaced them with his own Nazi pastors, who would spread said distorted Christianity. I also remember that he also made his own version of the Bible that was basically rewritten to become tolerant/accepting of Nazi ideas (including, but certainly not limited to, the fact that Jesus was supposedly Aryan, rather than Jewish, and the replacement of the cross in most public displays with the swastika).

It is also worth noting that Hitler respected the Catholic church (while showing contempt at best for Protestants). However, this was more because of the Catholic Church's political power, and certainly not because of their teachings or values.

Success has many fathers
Failure is an orphan

Christians, Austrians, Socialists and others that where part of Hitlers mentality all seek to disown him. If he won, I am sure they would be singing praise to him.
The Christian defense is now that Hitler wasnt truly Christian despite claiming to be and believing a church was an important part of a political party and government. Hitler may have many policies Christians, Austrians and Socialists disagree with, yet all where part of his reign.

[Pope Joan]

Sometimes the people need an opiate.

Religion generally also serves to support the social order, and this is true of any and all well supported world religions.

Humans have an urge to know what it is like over the horizon. We are frustrated because once we pursue the horizon it still stretches out ahead of us. What is it like before the world, before birth, after death, as a member of the opposite sex? What if we had wings and could fly, what would that be like? Some turn to science for answers, others to inward examination.

I see nothing wrong with this. Most of the ills associated with religion are attributable to institutional practices, and you could find similar problems with other ideological systems.

[Slakonian]

Sometimes the people need an opiate.

Religion generally also serves to support the social order, and this is true of any and all well supported world religions.

Humans have an urge to know what it is like over the horizon. We are frustrated because once we pursue the horizon it still stretches out ahead of us. What is it like before the world, before birth, after death, as a member of the opposite sex? What if we had wings and could fly, what would that be like? Some turn to science for answers, others to inward examination.

I see nothing wrong with this. Most of the ills associated with religion are attributable to institutional practices, and you could find similar problems with other ideological systems.

The best explenation^

[Mostrov]

Success has many fathers
Failure is an orphan

Christians, Austrians, Socialists and others that where part of Hitlers mentality all seek to disown him. If he won, I am sure they would be singing praise to him.
The Christian defense is now that Hitler wasnt truly Christian despite claiming to be and believing a church was an important part of a political party and government. Hitler may have many policies Christians, Austrians and Socialists disagree with, yet all where part of his reign.

Considering he probably wouldn't have been that kind to the church post war I disagree, this is something that has been repeatedly stated by people who wish to smear whatever sectarian side as evil.

He wasn't really what you could call Christian, there was a previous thread on that and there were people who went into it in much greater detail than we should here.

Hitler breathed, you had better start holding your breath!

[Sungai Pusat]

Hello everyone!! This is my first time posting a thread, and wanted to ask. What would the world look like without religion?

Without any religion? And nothing to replace it?

Most likely a technologically advanced civilisation. One much moreso than our current one: In fact, maybe one that could reach into space.

Realistically? Probably the same shithole we have today, just for a completely different reason.

To be fair, though, that reason, whatever it were, would probably be easier to knock down than 'God', considering that anything else would potentially have to be mortal if religion is not able to be invoked as a reason to... well, do shitty things in the name of it.

[Bundesdeutschland]

Religion can be good. If you go to church every sunday to pray, that's fine. If you go to a mosque and pray to Allah, that's fine. If you go to a church and blow it up, that is NOT fine. If you go to a mosque and blow it up, that is NOT fine. Religion is good. Religious violence is not. Nor is religious intolerance or idiocy. Like seriously, what's with creationists these days?

That I don't remember creationists doing. I do remember Gadaffi doing that though!

[Bundesdeutschland]

"Insert God abandoned you when you killed his son cliche - here"

Funny, I thought God would be a bit more rational than that.

No polemic please! The Jews are still his people!

[Ikania]

Religion can be good. If you go to church every sunday to pray, that's fine. If you go to a mosque and pray to Allah, that's fine. If you go to a church and blow it up, that is NOT fine. If you go to a mosque and blow it up, that is NOT fine. Religion is good. Religious violence is not. Nor is religious intolerance or idiocy. Like seriously, what's with creationists these days?

Do creationists blow up mosques?

No. They can believe what they want, but most of them are trying to force it on people these days. Like seriously! Believe what you believe, but don't force other to believe.

[Sailsia]

Do creationists blow up mosques?

No. They can believe what they want, but most of them are trying to force it on people these days. Like seriously! Believe what you believe, but don't force other to believe.

Yeah man, totally. How dare these liberals try to teach my kids that 2+2=4. I was raised by God fearing believers in the 2+2=5 theory, and it's my right to make sure my kids only hear the same, you here me Obama? Get your liberal spin-zone out of public schools and let me the kids decide what 2+2 equals!